No way. Challenging for both titles is way better than a win here or there. Or would you be happier in Haug's skin than in Boullier's? Is Mercedes season a success because of the win? Really? No. That is a real failure. Is Maldonado's season a success? No, it was a failure

Agreed. Romains season has also been a success despite of his problems, at least in comparison with fast guys like Maldo and Schumi.

No way. Challenging for both titles is way better than a win here or there. Or would you be happier in Haug's skin than in Boullier's? Is Mercedes season a success because of the win? Really? No. That is a real failure. Is Maldonado's season a success? No, it was a failure.

Lotus has built a good car, Kimi has driven brilliantly and Grosjean has shown great flashes of speed. There's not a hint of failure in any of the elements unless you want to invent them.

I think I'm just being honest. After all I'm big Lotus fan. Why would I invent anything?

I agree with you that what they achieved this season after troublesome 2011 season is a big success. That's the bigger picture.

But there is no guarantee they will be fighting for wins next season. There are some indications, but in reality it's far from certain. So, them not scoring a win is a failure. After all they are racing to win.

Media many times said that Lotus failed to capitalise on car's performance, the team also acknowlege that.

It all depends on the perspective and the expectations, as I said in earlier post

Media many times said that Lotus failed to capitalise on car's performance, the team also acknowlege that.

it doesn't mean it was. it was there about in race condition for a couple of races. anyway. lotus has themselves to blame regarding this because Boullshit keeps saying that we will win this weekend as he always does.

annoying to read the "we don't need to win" but then again maybe the media is twisting Romain's words

i think Kimi and Lotus Renault will be reasonably strong at Suzuka though and this is a very important weekend.

I think I'm just being honest. After all I'm big Lotus fan. Why would I invent anything?

I agree with you that what they achieved this season after troublesome 2011 season is a big success. That's the bigger picture.

But there is no guarantee they will be fighting for wins next season. There are some indications, but in reality it's far from certain. So, them not scoring a win is a failure. After all they are racing to win.

Media many times said that Lotus failed to capitalise on car's performance, the team also acknowlege that.

It all depends on the perspective and the expectations, as I said in earlier post

I don't get your point at all. If you want to isolate 2012, which I think is good to get a fair picture, you shouldn't be speculating about how competitive they'll be in the future. Let's isolate 2012 then!

Team has built a good car, able to win races but not enough overall to challenge for titles. What's the season outcome? They haven't won, but they managed to stay in both titles fight. Fan or not, you must have really weird priorities to call this a failure. They are close in wcc to teams that have had better cars overall, and close and even above in wdc to drivers with better cars. And that, my friend, weights way more than a race win in order to call this success or failure.

I don't get your point at all. If you want to isolate 2012, which I think is good to get a fair picture, you shouldn't be speculating about how competitive they'll be in the future. Let's isolate 2012 then!

Team has built a good car, able to win races but not enough overall to challenge for titles. What's the season outcome? They haven't won, but they managed to stay in both titles fight. Fan or not, you must have really weird priorities to call this a failure. They are close in wcc to teams that have had better cars overall, and close and even above in wdc to drivers with better cars. And that, my friend, weights way more than a race win in order to call this success or failure.

Failure is the wrong here but the benchmark this year is Ferrari and compared to them something is lacking at Lotus in the broader sense of maximizing chances, the lack of wins being just a symptom. Your earlier choice of uneven adjectives (good car, brilliant Kimi, great Grosjean) suggests in itself that something has been missing and that that something is rather the car factor than the drivers.

I could argue the opposite and claim that the car is flattering both Raikkonen and Grosjean. The team and machinery haven't been flawless but it's really hard to make a point that the Ferrari or even the McLaren have been better as overall packages than the Lotus. Both Kimi and Romian have been impressive especially considering the come-back and rookie circumstances but they've also shown weaknesses and it's tempting to think what more could the car achieve with an even more complete, combining Kimi's racecraft and Romain's qualifying form kind of driver sitting in it.

Perhaps he feels that with the car they have, they could(or should) have acheived more.

Again, what's 'achieving more'? Winning a race? I don't think that's it. Mercedes has won, and their season is considered a stinker.

E20 has been taken where it belongs wcc wise,and well above its weight in wdc. I wouldn' call chosing between this and a race win "a matter of perspective", there's no one here who would honestly pick Williams' or Mercedes' season over Lotus. And if someone does, it's him lacking perspective.

Anyway when you have to read that "it's hard to say if Lotus hasn't had a better or worse car than McLaren" then it's normal to get to all sorts of nonsense when rating team's and driver's performance.

For me it stands like this:RB has been a better car overall than Lotus, so has Mclaren. These are the two best cars this year. Then it's close between Lotus and Ferrari, with Ferrari struggling initially and Lotus recently. Yet Ferrari, with one driver doing a crap job, is still in front. I think the current WCC reflects pretty well teams performance, and that goes both for the order and for the little size of the gaps between them.

For me it stands like this:RB has been a better car overall than Lotus, so has Mclaren. These are the two best cars this year. Then it's close between Lotus and Ferrari, with Ferrari struggling initially and Lotus recently. Yet Ferrari, with one driver doing a crap job, is still in front. I think the current WCC reflects pretty well teams performance, and that goes both for the order and for the little size of the gaps between them.

Kimi has had a strong comeback year, dont get me wrong. Very consistent, pretty damn quick fairly often. But I dont think some people, myself included, think that he's gotten everything from the car over the whole season. For all his consistency and being the only front championship runner with no DNF's, he's still behind Alonso by 45 points in a car that I think has been better overall. That consistency has kept him in the back of everybody's mind and up the championship table, but the lack of a win in a car that many think is capable of it seems to stop a lot of people from believing Kimi is actually a threat to the WDC. I mean, Kimi's 3rd in the standings right now, but its not out of the realm of reasonableness to think he could drop to 5th or even 6th in the standings by the end of the year. That can still be considered a positive, but like korzeniow said, it depends on your perspective and your expectations.

It's almost impossible for a driver new to a team to get the maximum out of the car that same year. When was the last time that happened? Assuming Fernando is the benchmark, even he had some interesting mistakes in 2010. So yes, technically, the drivers haven't been able to get the maximum out of the car. But having that expectation is kind of odd, to say the least, given that both drivers and team are new to each other.

I think I'm just being honest. After all I'm big Lotus fan. Why would I invent anything?I agree with you that what they achieved this season after troublesome 2011 season is a big success. That's the bigger picture.

You also dont believe that Sauber has ever been faster then Lotus. As a fan perhaps you want to believe Lotus is better then they actually are.

Kimi has had a strong comeback year, dont get me wrong. Very consistent, pretty damn quick fairly often. But I dont think some people, myself included, think that he's gotten everything from the car over the whole season. For all his consistency and being the only front championship runner with no DNF's, he's still behind Alonso by 45 points in a car that I think has been better overall. That consistency has kept him in the back of everybody's mind and up the championship table, but the lack of a win in a car that many think is capable of it seems to stop a lot of people from believing Kimi is actually a threat to the WDC. I mean, Kimi's 3rd in the standings right now, but its not out of the realm of reasonableness to think he could drop to 5th or even 6th in the standings by the end of the year. That can still be considered a positive, but like korzeniow said, it depends on your perspective and your expectations.

Perspective is a funny thing Ferrari kept on repeating how terrible their car is yet they keep on improving, and Lotus kept on saying they will win every weekend yet they kept on degrading. Of course you believe that Lotus is a better car. What about the team? Is Lotus a better team then Ferrari? Ferrari had a car that was clearly faster then everyone else in certain conditions like in rain, and we've had a lot of rainy races this year, Lotus on the otherhand were bad in the rain. Ferrari has much faster pitstops and better strategies then Lotus. Alonso has had better reliability as well although Kimi hasn't suffered a DNF yet, he's had 5 races with Kers issues. Ferrari has had pole positions and wins, the car isn't the best but it isn't that bad.

It's almost impossible for a driver new to a team to get the maximum out of the car that same year. When was the last time that happened? Assuming Fernando is the benchmark, even he had some interesting mistakes in 2010. So yes, technically, the drivers haven't been able to get the maximum out of the car. But having that expectation is kind of odd, to say the least, given that both drivers and team are new to each other.

What I said in the Kimi thread a few days back -

It is true that these drivers (Lewis, Alonso or Vettel) may to be getting the maximum out of their current cars, but what you forgot to consider is that the cars which they drive, have been designed and built around their preferences, and they have been with their current team for multiple number of years, allowing the teams to have good baseline data/setups for different tracks according to their preferences - allowing them to be much better prepared for each weekend. When they were new in their respective teams, did they get the best out of the cars right away? if you look back you will see that this is an increasingly difficult argument to justify.

If you consider the Lotus drivers, they are driving a car which was not designed around either of them, and the team doesn't have any baseline data for Kimi, and probably a minimum amount of data for Romain. On top of the above, Kimi was away for two years, further compounding the point.

It's almost impossible for a driver new to a team to get the maximum out of the car that same year. When was the last time that happened? Assuming Fernando is the benchmark, even he had some interesting mistakes in 2010. So yes, technically, the drivers haven't been able to get the maximum out of the car. But having that expectation is kind of odd, to say the least, given that both drivers and team are new to each other.

That was really just a nicer way of me saying something that I didn't want to. Alonso may have made a couple mistakes in 2010, but that can be expected of any driver in any season. Its hard to say he had many 'off' days, though.

Ferrari has had pole positions and wins, the car isn't the best but it isn't that bad.

Never said it was. But are those pole positions and wins because the car is that great, or because of the person driving it?

All those points about the team aspects are valid to an extent(perhaps a little exaggerated in some cases), but I still think the Lotus would be the preferable seat to have. I mean, aside from his nightmare of a German GP and Singapore when he had to move over for his teammate, Grosjean hasn't finished worse than 6th place when he's finished. Its a really good car they've had and despite the apparent drop in competitiveness the past couple races, I think its still very good. I expect it should be more at home at Suzuka than it was in Singapore.

As for Kimi and qualifying:
1. Aus - Kimi bowed out in Q3 due to a combination of team's and his mistake. Nothing to do with qualy pace.
2. Malaysia - Kimi outqualified Grosjean, but got demoted because of gearbox penalty.
3. China - P5 for Kimi and P10 for Grosjean.
4. Bahrain - Kimi actually had a better qualy since he did the only timed lap as planned and was asked not to go again as it may not be worth losing tyres. Grosjean, on the other hand had to go out because of his bad time posted during his planned run. So the positions were misleading. Kimi actually did just fine, if not better.
5. Spain - Kimi and Grosjean qualified P4 and P3 respectively, but Kimi got the jump on Grosjean at the start. So his qualifying behind Grosjean did not actually matter because he got ahead of him anyway right at the start.
6. Monaco - A bad weekend. All to do with steering specially made for Kimi that did not fit at all. Not really the case of qualy hurting him.
7. Canada - Differential problem cost him qualy position. By team's estimates, the corrected time would have put Kimi faster or on par with Grosjean.
8. Europe - Kimi got outqualified by Grosjean by 0.008 s. Again he would have had the jump on Grosjean off the start if not having to back off for Maldanodo. Still did not make any difference in the end. P2.
9. Britain - qualified better than Grosjean.
10. Germany - qualified better than Grosjean
11. Hungary - Was faster than Grosjean throughout qualy sims and in the final run made a set-up mistake adding too much wing angle. Nothing to do with lacking qualy pace.
12. Belgium - N/A
13. Italy - N/A
14. Singapore - Kimi says for some reason tyres did not behave, something other drivers have also said. But you can count this as Kimi lacking pace.

Really there are only one or two races where Kimi was behind Grosjean in qualy pace and had his race compromised because of that. Kimi has been really lucky in that the occasions where he was behind Grosjean in qualy pace, it did not affect him much in the end. The inferior qualy pace and the related compromise is just a myth, it never really happened like that. All these to prove that the Lotus E20 hasn't really been let down in the hands of its experienced driver. For that matter, I don't think Grosjean has taken that much points off Kimi and the car's WDC campaign also hasn't suffered much as a result. The E20 has not been let down at all. Actually I find it a bit flattering that it is leading two McLarens and a Red Bull in WDC standings and has led the other Red Bull also at various points in the season.

You also dont believe that Sauber has ever been faster then Lotus. As a fan perhaps you want to believe Lotus is better then they actually are.

Perspective is a funny thing Ferrari kept on repeating how terrible their car is yet they keep on improving, and Lotus kept on saying they will win every weekend yet they kept on degrading. Of course you believe that Lotus is a better car. What about the team? Is Lotus a better team then Ferrari? Ferrari had a car that was clearly faster then everyone else in certain conditions like in rain, and we've had a lot of rainy races this year, Lotus on the otherhand were bad in the rain. Ferrari has much faster pitstops and better strategies then Lotus. Alonso has had better reliability as well although Kimi hasn't suffered a DNF yet, he's had 5 races with Kers issues. Ferrari has had pole positions and wins, the car isn't the best but it isn't that bad.

Well put..Boullier's comments this year on their prospects have surprised me a little..twice now..he has repeated the same words,''Our aim was to finish 4th in WCC''...he usually adds the little,''but yah we'll get the maximum we can'' comment at the end too.

I get that the performance this year has been a major improvement from Lotus/Renault's past seasons.if they were offered the current points position late last year,you'd think they wouldve grabbed it with both hands.But considering the fact the E20 was one of the front runners at all weekends in the first half of the season,sitting right now with 4th in WCC 14 points adrift of Ferrari(where only 1 driver contributed to the points in the first half),surely isnt something to be proud of when it comes to car development thru the season and Quali/Race day management.Boullier wants us to not look at the fact , how crap the car has been the last 3 weekends and how a race win has still eluded them,by stating that they have still attained their pre season targets..Maybe the team management has forgotten how to aim for the top after spending spending so much time in the doldrums past few years

Also reaffirms the opinion that certain folks have always had about Lotus being a very strong steam when it comes to the factory engineering team's prowess in putting out a good car at the start of the season,but pretty weak when it comes to handling race strategies and in season development.

PS..mind you thats just Boullier im talking about,not Allison..the latter pretty much comes off as the opposite of Boullier..hes always making mention of the points,the team lost by a driver/team error or how they couldve done better..More power to him,i guess.

That was really just a nicer way of me saying something that I didn't want to. Alonso may have made a couple mistakes in 2010, but that can be expected of any driver in any season. Its hard to say he had many 'off' days, though.

Just a couple of mistakes? Come on. He made many mistakes, the most among the contenders.

As for Kimi and qualifying:1. Aus - Kimi bowed out in Q3 due to a combination of team's and his mistake. Nothing to do with qualy pace.2. Malaysia - Kimi outqualified Grosjean, but got demoted because of gearbox penalty.3. China - P5 for Kimi and P10 for Grosjean.4. Bahrain - Kimi actually had a better qualy since he did the only timed lap as planned and was asked not to go again as it may not be worth losing tyres. Grosjean, on the other hand had to go out because of his bad time posted during his planned run. So the positions were misleading. Kimi actually did just fine, if not better.5. Spain - Kimi and Grosjean qualified P4 and P3 respectively, but Kimi got the jump on Grosjean at the start. So his qualifying behind Grosjean did not actually matter because he got ahead of him anyway right at the start.6. Monaco - A bad weekend. All to do with steering specially made for Kimi that did not fit at all. Not really the case of qualy hurting him.7. Canada - Differential problem cost him qualy position. By team's estimates, the corrected time would have put Kimi faster or on par with Grosjean.8. Europe - Kimi got outqualified by Grosjean by 0.008 s. Again he would have had the jump on Grosjean off the start if not having to back off for Maldanodo. Still did not make any difference in the end. P2.9. Britain - qualified better than Grosjean.10. Germany - qualified better than Grosjean11. Hungary - Was faster than Grosjean throughout qualy sims and in the final run made a set-up mistake adding too much wing angle. Nothing to do with lacking qualy pace.12. Belgium - N/A13. Italy - N/A14. Singapore - Kimi says for some reason tyres did not behave, something other drivers have also said. But you can count this as Kimi lacking pace.

Really there are only one or two races where Kimi was behind Grosjean in qualy pace and had his race compromised because of that. Kimi has been really lucky in that the occasions where he was behind Grosjean in qualy pace, it did not affect him much in the end. The inferior qualy pace and the related compromise is just a myth, it never really happened like that. All these to prove that the Lotus E20 hasn't really been let down in the hands of its experienced driver. For that matter, I don't think Grosjean has taken that much points off Kimi and the car's WDC campaign also hasn't suffered much as a result. The E20 has not been let down at all. Actually I find it a bit flattering that it is leading two McLarens and a Red Bull in WDC standings and has led the other Red Bull also at various points in the season.

That's extremely one-sided view. Why don't you acknowlege also Grosjean's problems in quali? Like China or Germany or UK. Or the fact that on some circiuts he was driving for the first time? Or since you examine quali performance then why you put a comment that Kimi could overtake Romain into T3 in Valencia. Mysterious behaviour of the tyres in Singapore? Dude, both Permance and Allison confirmed it was Kimi's fault.

fanboyism much

Well put..Boullier's comments this year on their prospects have surprised me a little..twice now..he has repeated the same words,''Our aim was to finish 4th in WCC''...he usually adds the little,''but yah we'll get the maximum we can'' comment at the end too.

I get that the performance this year has been a major improvement from Lotus/Renault's past seasons.if they were offered the current points position late last year,you'd think they wouldve grabbed it with both hands.But considering the fact the E20 was one of the front runners at all weekends in the first half of the season,sitting right now with 4th in WCC 14 points adrift of Ferrari(where only 1 driver contributed to the points in the first half),surely isnt something to be proud of when it comes to car development thru the season and Quali/Race day management.Boullier wants us to not look at the fact , how crap the car has been the last 3 weekends and how a race win has still eluded them,by stating that they have still attained their pre season targets..Maybe the team management has forgotten how to aim for the top after spending spending so much time in the doldrums past few years

Also reaffirms the opinion that certain folks have always had about Lotus being a very strong steam when it comes to the factory engineering team's prowess in putting out a good car at the start of the season,but pretty weak when it comes to handling race strategies and in season development.

PS..mind you thats just Boullier im talking about,not Allison..the latter pretty much comes off as the opposite of Boullier..hes always making mention of the points,the team lost by a driver/team error or how they couldve done better..More power to him,i guess.

Yes, those are/were very mistrious words coming from Boullier, especially at the time when E20 was arguably the best car. He was also stating this along with the words that with their Device they will be able fight for victory at every race. It's very unusual. he later explained that he didn't want to put pressure on the team. But I can't hope but feel that there is more to it....

But I dont think some people, myself included, think that he's gotten everything from the car over the whole season.

Of course he hasn't!! just as anyone else on the grid. If that's your problem with Lotus/Kimi's/ Romain's season, you should be dissapointed with the full grid, hell, with anyone in any grid, even Schumacher in 2004. Think you're trying too hard to dig something negative. Lotus has done nearly as well as anyother team, they aren't best but they aren't far, Kimi has performed on the Vettel's or Hamilton's top league, Romain has shown flashes of crazy speed. No dramas unless you really try hard to create them.

Of course he hasn't!! just as anyone else on the grid. If that's your problem with Lotus/Kimi's/ Romain's season, you should be dissapointed with the full grid, hell, with anyone in any grid, even Schumacher in 2004. Think you're trying too hard to dig something negative. Lotus has done nearly as well as anyother team, they aren't best but they aren't far, Kimi has performed on the Vettel's or Hamilton's top league, Romain has shown flashes of crazy speed. No dramas unless you really try hard to create them.

While you talks about "absolutes" I think Seanspeed meant in reference to other drivers.

That's extremely one-sided view. Why don't you acknowlege also Grosjean's problems in quali? Like China or Germany or UK. Or the fact that on some circiuts he was driving for the first time? Or since you examine quali performance then why you put a comment that Kimi could overtake Romain into T3 in Valencia.

Maybe because he's debating the claim that poor qualifying form has hurted Kimi's results badly, and not drawing any sort of direct performance comparison with his teammate? That's why it's onesided.

Sometimes understanding what's being discussed before posting helps. And just to clarify, my opinion on the issue discussed is not the same.

It's almost impossible for a driver new to a team to get the maximum out of the car that same year. When was the last time that happened? Assuming Fernando is the benchmark, even he had some interesting mistakes in 2010. So yes, technically, the drivers haven't been able to get the maximum out of the car. But having that expectation is kind of odd, to say the least, given that both drivers and team are new to each other.

Kimi is new to the team but let's remember that he won his first race for Ferrari (as did Alonso, by the way) and his title in the first year there and didn't improve his competitiveness in relation to Massa in the years which followed, so dunno if that's that much of an issue. Besides, getting the maximum out of the car is just a phrase. If we take it in absolute terms then of course nobody has ever done that as nobody is totally flawless ever, not even Alonso this year. The question is to which extent one maximizes one's chances. Which takes me to the following extracts which I have an issue with: (sorry for not quoting the full posts but it would made mine too long, I don't think these are taken out of context in any way)

The inferior qualy pace [of Kimi] and the related compromise is just a myth, it never really happened like that.

Kimi's quali woes as a driver might have been exaggerated, but so have been the Lotus' qualy woes as car characteristics. After Silverstone, the average qualifying position of the better Lotus driver in this regard (Grosjean) was higher than Alonso's average. Despite this, the better Lotus driver in the standings (Kimi) was trailing Alonso by 46 points already then. So basically by the middle of the season the Lotus was out-scored by an almost-two-wins-margin by a car that was on average slower in quali.

Is Lotus a better team then Ferrari? Ferrari had a car that was clearly faster then everyone else in certain conditions like in rain, and we've had a lot of rainy races this year, Lotus on the otherhand were bad in the rain.

The Ferrari did show winning pace in wet conditions (Malaysia, Germany quali) but it's funny how you don't mention how the Lotus showed winning pace in very hot conditions (Bahrain, Hungary). The difference is that Alonso fully capitalized on his car being at its fastest by scoring his wins then, the Lotus drivers didn't. Hence the question remains: what more could an Alonso have achieved in this Lotus?

E20 has been taken where it belongs wcc wise,and well above its weight in wdc.

All the best four cars this year have looked very close together as overall packages and it's very hard, if not impossible to say which one is the best and which isn't. McLaren might have the quickest car but their reliability has been appaling and the team has made very costly operational blunders - Lotus' reliability or strategy issues have been peanuts compared to McLaren's. They also suffered their pace struggle like the current Lotus slump around Valencia. Red Bull has been a little bit hit and miss with everything but generally there or thereabouts. Lotus might not have gotten the highest peaks but it's the most consistent package out there, alongside Ferrari.

To make a long story short, the E20 has been a top, WDC-capable car so far and while Kimi has driven well this year he hasn't driven as well as some people are implying.

Kimi is new to the team but let's remember that he won his first race for Ferrari (as did Alonso, by the way) and his title in the first year there and didn't improve his competitiveness in relation to Massa in the years which followed, so dunno if that's that much of an issue. Besides, getting the maximum out of the car is just a phrase. If we take it in absolute terms then of course nobody has ever done that as nobody is totally flawless ever, not even Alonso this year. The question is to which extent one maximizes one's chances. Which takes me to the following extracts which I have an issue with: (sorry for not quoting the full posts but it would made mine too long, I don't think these are taken out of context in any way)

Kimi's quali woes as a driver might have been exaggerated, but so have been the Lotus' qualy woes as car characteristics. After Silverstone, the average qualifying position of the better Lotus driver in this regard (Grosjean) was higher than Alonso's average. Despite this, the better Lotus driver in the standings (Kimi) was trailing Alonso by 46 points already then. So basically by the middle of the season the Lotus was out-scored by an almost-two-wins-margin by a car that was on average slower in quali.

The Ferrari did show winning pace in wet conditions (Malaysia, Germany quali) but it's funny how you don't mention how the Lotus showed winning pace in very hot conditions (Bahrain, Hungary). The difference is that Alonso fully capitalized on his car being at its fastest by scoring his wins then, the Lotus drivers didn't. Hence the question remains: what more could an Alonso have achieved in this Lotus?

All the best four cars this year have looked very close together as overall packages and it's very hard, if not impossible to say which one is the best and which isn't. McLaren might have the quickest car but their reliability has been appaling and the team has made very costly operational blunders - Lotus' reliability or strategy issues have been peanuts compared to McLaren's. They also suffered their pace struggle like the current Lotus slump around Valencia. Red Bull has been a little bit hit and miss with everything but generally there or thereabouts. Lotus might not have gotten the highest peaks but it's the most consistent package out there, alongside Ferrari.

To make a long story short, the E20 has been a top, WDC-capable car so far and while Kimi has driven well this year he hasn't driven as well as some people are implying.

The E20 has been at the top of the midpack this season, no doubt. However, Lotus strategy and weekend execution have been in the bottom half of the grid. The greatest car and driver in the world is all for naught when spending half of races needlessly trapped in trains and finishing races on most optimal set of tires tires with 5 laps on them bc team has no idea how to time a stop properly.

Top teams don't need the best car or best driver when their competition operates like Lotus and (to much lesser extent) McL have this year. Ferrari have been the best I've seen them in a decade on this, and the guys behind that (presumably everyone, as they operate like well-oiled machine) deserve a championship for it.

The Ferrari did show winning pace in wet conditions (Malaysia, Germany quali) but it's funny how you don't mention how the Lotus showed winning pace in very hot conditions (Bahrain, Hungary). The difference is that Alonso fully capitalized on his car being at its fastest by scoring his wins then, the Lotus drivers didn't. Hence the question remains: what more could an Alonso have achieved in this Lotus?

Right because Alonso was going to leave Ferrari and drive for Lotus?

That is an irrelevant comparison, Alonso will never drive for a team like Lotus. Lotus is lucky to have Kimi in the first place they where in in the doldrums last year, without him they would not be 3rd in the championship. Their options last year was between Petrov and Senna. If either of those options were driving this year alongside Grosjean then they wouldn't have been near a consistently competitive level. The difference between the hot races where Lotus had good pace and where Ferrari had good pace in the rainy races, is that Ferrari where still clearly the fastest and could qualify on pole. Even in those races where Lotus was fast, they still didn't have nearly enough pace for pole. The Ferrari has been the most consistent car, even Massa is regularly outqualifying the Lotus drivers these days.

Mostly because the team and the car hasn't been up to it, and Kimi's qualifying in Hungary. And they have no chance to win for the rest of the season, there are just to many faster teams, so it goes back to the car.

Last year the top three finishers all did exactly the same strategy with three stints on used soft tyres and a final stint on new mediums. The difference was in the tyre degradation each of them suffered and the laps on which they chose to pit. Button was able to run a slightly longer opening stint than Vettel and took the victory that way.

This year we have tended to see races run with one less stop than in 2011, so the likely strategy for Suzuka this year is some drivers doing two stops and some drivers doing three.

and

And it looks like a weekend where saving a set of new set of soft tyres from qualifying might be worth doing (by doing one run only in Q2 and Q3)

Three stops is actually faster, as the graph below shows, but it requires the driver to pass the two stoppers in the final stint. If there is a safety car, it will hand an advantage to the two stoppers.

But then we had mediums instead of hards last year and Pirelli have supposedly strengthened the tires in the shoulder region..As he himself states later in the article,a more reasonable comparison would be with Silverstone this year when Webber won with his 1st stint on softs and then the next two stints on the harder compound.JA thinks the performance difference b/w the two compounds would be around 0.6 to 0.8 sec/lap

Last year the top three finishers all did exactly the same strategy with three stints on used soft tyres and a final stint on new mediums. The difference was in the tyre degradation each of them suffered and the laps on which they chose to pit. Button was able to run a slightly longer opening stint than Vettel and took the victory that way.

This year we have tended to see races run with one less stop than in 2011, so the likely strategy for Suzuka this year is some drivers doing two stops and some drivers doing three.

and

And it looks like a weekend where saving a set of new set of soft tyres from qualifying might be worth doing (by doing one run only in Q2 and Q3)

Three stops is actually faster, as the graph below shows, but it requires the driver to pass the two stoppers in the final stint. If there is a safety car, it will hand an advantage to the two stoppers.

But then we had mediums instead of hards last year and Pirelli have supposedly strengthened the tires in the shoulder region..As he himself states later in the article,a more reasonable comparison would be with Silverstone this year when Webber won with his 1st stint on softs and then the next two stints on the harder compound.JA thinks the performance difference b/w the two compounds would be around 0.6 to 0.8 sec/lap

That is an irrelevant comparison, Alonso will never drive for a team like Lotus. Lotus is lucky to have Kimi in the first place they where in in the doldrums last year, without him they would not be 3rd in the championship. Their options last year was between Petrov and Senna. If either of those options were driving this year alongside Grosjean then they wouldn't have been near a consistently competitive level. The difference between the hot races where Lotus had good pace and where Ferrari had good pace in the rainy races, is that Ferrari where still clearly the fastest and could qualify on pole. Even in those races where Lotus was fast, they still didn't have nearly enough pace for pole. The Ferrari has been the most consistent car, even Massa is regularly outqualifying the Lotus drivers these days.

What days? Last time Massa qualified higher than Lotus boys was in Italy, not the best track for Lotus. Before that it was UK when quali were wet. So you are completly wrong.

As for your point that Ferrari were winning with clearly fastest car also falls when you look at races like Malaysia nad Valencia. Ferari didn't have the fastest car then, it was Alonso who made a diffrence

...The question is to which extent one maximizes one's chances. ...Hence the question remains: what more could an Alonso have achieved in this Lotus?

But it's obvious that Alonso would have extracted more. Apart from his immense talent, he has had experience with the Pirelli tyres, has worked with Renault/Lotus before, the team has baseline setup preferences and telemetry from his earlier years, the team would know his steering preferences, etc.

It's bizarre to me that you would compare against Fernando of all people. If you want to be objective, you should compare Kimi's and Romain's performance against another driver who has just joined a team for the first time and is driving the Pirelli's for the first time (and correct for the difference in car performance of course). Then, and only then, can you make a reasonable case that Kimi/Romain has underperformed or over-performed even after expectations have been calibrated for them being new to the team and the tyres.

The above should be obvious to any objective F1 fan with a reasonable understanding of F1 and its history.

If some of you set your expectations really high initially and didn't account for both drivers being new to the team, you have only yourself to blame for not having a deep enough understanding of the sport.

That was really just a nicer way of me saying something that I didn't want to. Alonso may have made a couple mistakes in 2010, but that can be expected of any driver in any season.

There is no "may" about it, he did. And it was more than a couple. Why you find it necessary to handwave your way around that is a mystery. So according to you, some types of mistakes are "allowed" and others not when a driver is new to a team. This is hair-splitting at its finest.

Its hard to say he had many 'off' days, though.

More handwaving. Kimi hasn't been "off" anything. He has clearly and objectively had trouble with Q3, safety-car restarts, and the steering (in Monaco). That's about it. These are clearly identifiable areas to be improved upon. You don't have to try and make it seem like he is mysteriously "off" his previous best. All of these will be rectified next year.

Your attempts at being diplomatic aren't going down well because you're using a lot of weasel-words and handwaving and then moving the goalposts when you're called on it (Oh, I actually meant X, but said Y only to be nice).

But it's obvious that Alonso would have extracted more. Apart from his immense talent, he has had experience with the Pirelli tyres, has worked with Renault/Lotus before, the team has baseline setup preferences and telemetry from his earlier years, the team would know his steering preferences, etc.

It's bizarre to me that you would compare against Fernando of all people. If you want to be objective, you should compare Kimi's and Romain's performance against another driver who has just joined a team for the first time and is driving the Pirelli's for the first time (and correct for the difference in car performance of course). Then, and only then, can you make a reasonable case that Kimi/Romain has underperformed or over-performed even after expectations have been calibrated for them being new to the team and the tyres.

The above should be obvious to any objective F1 fan with a reasonable understanding of F1 and its history.

If some of you set your expectations really high initially and didn't account for both drivers being new to the team, you have only yourself to blame for not having a deep enough understanding of the sport.

I think he raised valid points about Kimi and Alonso fighting for the title already in their first year with Ferrari.

As for expectations, what would you expect from champion? Didn't many people claim Kimi is the fastest driver? You can have it both ways.

There is no "may" about it, he did. And it was more than a couple. Why you find it necessary to handwave your way around that is a mystery. So according to you, some types of mistakes are "allowed" and others not when a driver is new to a team. This is hair-splitting at its finest.

More handwaving. Kimi hasn't been "off" anything. He has clearly and objectively had trouble with Q3, safety-car restarts, and the steering (in Monaco). That's about it. These are clearly identifiable areas to be improved upon. You don't have to try and make it seem like he is mysteriously "off" his previous best. All of these will be rectified next year.

Your attempts at being diplomatic aren't going down well because you're using a lot of weasel-words and handwaving and then moving the goalposts when you're called on it (Oh, I actually meant X, but said Y only to be nice).

I can think of couple of GP where Kimi was off. Like Monaco, Canada, Valencia. That people have diffrent opinion doesn't necessary mean they have an agenda

I think he raised valid points about Kimi and Alonso fighting for the title already in their first year with Ferrari.

Yes he is pretty objective in his comments. The point is, and I think we are all in general agreement here, that historically, a driver new to the team hasn't extracted the maximum from the machinery. I brought up Fernando because I think he's the benchmark this last decade.

As for expectations, what would you expect from champion? Didn't many people claim Kimi is the fastest driver? You can have it both ways.

I am more than satisfied with Kimi's and Romain's performance and expect them both to improve next year because the team and them will both be able to work together better and they'll have Pirelli experience, baseline setups, and telemetry from this year. So some rain on a Friday will not impact their weekend as much next year as much as it did this year, for example.

I never claimed Kimi is the fastest, and I think Fernando is faster overall. If you managed to get riled up by various Kimi fans making certain claims and defensively ratcheted up your own expectations as a result, you have only yourself to blame.

In general, I support both the drivers and the entire team. I don't run around saying something like "The question remains: what would an Adrian Newey have done with a Lotus budget and resources". That would be silly.